Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Smoking in movies Options · View
Magical_felix
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 11:58:07 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,769
Location: California
Should movies that contain characters that smoke get an automatic R rating?

Should drinking and other vices get R ratings too?

Will making smoking even more taboo increase it's appeal to teenagers?

I've been hearing plans to do this for about a year now. I think it's just a debate here in the United States but everyone's opinion is welcomed.

Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:05:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
No NO NO...Real people smoke, if it is written in the script there should be no censorship from the politicians and do-gooders(rolls eyes). Think 'Basic Instinct' without Sharon stone smoking in the leg crossing scene or Uma Thurman in Pulp fiction. As soon as they get R ratings ,then they'll decide to ban it all together.





What next ban drug taking in movies or drinking?? I can think of many movies which contain those kind of themes e.g. Requiem for a Dream.If politicians are allowed to make those laws then they'll ban adult themes of violence,sex, drug taking
Jacknife
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:09:30 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 197
Location: United Kingdom
Agreed. I think people who smoke are idiots, but that isn't a reason to ban or restrict there appearance in films. You stop people doing stupid things by education not by banning them from films.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:10:14 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Wait I'm adding on to this - Sherlock Holmes without a pipe, Bogart in Casablanca and how many times James bond would be dead if he didn't smoke. Will they then make those R-rated after the fact?
Magical_felix
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:20:24 PM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,769
Location: California
Loislane wrote:
Wait I'm adding on to this - Sherlock Holmes without a pipe, Bogart in Casablanca and how many times James bond would be dead if he didn't smoke. Will they then make those R-rated after the fact?


I agree. The first time Connery says Bond, James Bond in dr. No with a cigarette hanging from his lip while playing cards is the most iconic scene from the whole series. I bugged me that they made him all anti smoking in some of the newer ones.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:20:54 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,226
Location: United States
Personally, I'd like to see the government stop making such a huge effort to convince us that all of our children's flaws are due to the music and motion picture industries. Parents are the main source of information a child uses to align his or her moral compass. Children imitate their parents behavior far more than they'll ever imitate imitate what they see onscreen.

Interesting reading on the subject.


Quote:
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), "Children are influenced by media–they learn by observing, imitating, and making behaviors their own" (2001, p.1224). The influence of media on children has been the subject of increased attention among parents, educators, and health care professionals. The significance of this issue becomes obvious when one notes the diversity of Americans who share this concern. Included in this group of concerned citizens are those, most notably politicians, who typically stand in opposition to one another on many issues, but who stand together in agreement on this one.

Media influence on children has steadily increased as new and more sophisticated types of media have been developed and made available to the American public. Availability, as well as greater affordability for American families, has provided easier access to media for children. Beneficial effects include early readiness for learning, educational enrichment, opportunities to view or participate in discussions of social issues, exposure to the arts through music and performance, and entertainment. Harmful effects may result from sensationalization of violent behavior, exposure to subtle or explicit sexual content, promotion of unrealistic body images, presentation of poor health habits as desirable practices, and exposure to persuasive advertising targeting children.



Quote:
Just because our students can use media and technology doesn't mean they are effective at critically analyzing and evaluating the messages they receive. Students need a set of skills to ask important questions about what they watch, see, listen to and read. Often called media literacy, these skills include the ability to critically analyze media messages and the ability to use different kinds of communication technologies for self-expression and communication.



Quote:
Parental monitoring is a key factor, since the research studies show that increasing guidance from parents is at least as important as simply reducing media violence. Children may learn negative behavior patterns and values from many other experiences as well as TV programs, and parental guidance is needed to help children sort out these influences and develop the ability to make sound decisions on their own.



Quote:
The AAP, the Office of the Surgeon General, and the APA have offered recommendations to address the issues of media influence on children. Included in these recommendations are suggestions for parents, educators, and health care professionals to advocate for a safer media environment for children through media literacy. They urge media producers to be more responsible in their portrayal of violence. They advocate for more useful and effective media ratings.

A consistent recommendation in studies, however, is proactive parental involvement in children's media experiences. By monitoring what children hear and see, discussing issues that emerge, and sharing media time with their children, parents can moderate the negative influences as well as increase the positive effects of media in the lives of their children.


There's a lot more information at the link, including information about some studies that have been performed. I agree that modern media types CAN affect children's perception of normal, moral behavior, but only if the parents abdicate their responsibility in raising up their kids, and allow it.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 2:51:32 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 7,183
Location: Your dirty fantasy
Marketing strategies for Tobacco companies are built around a rather simple concept: People inherently want to be seen as "cool". Hence the formula goes that if people see someone (like a celebrity) that they think is "cool" smoking a certain brand of tobacco, or a "cool" bar/venue selling a specific brand of tobacco... then people will inherently want to tap into that image by also choosing to smoke that brand.

For generations, the tobacco industry has spent a whole lot of money buying off celebs and movie execs to have product visibility both on and off-screen.

I think it goes without saying that product placement in the media does influence consumer buying patterns and/or desires. That's why designers want stars to wear their gowns on the red carpet, and nobody can dispute the almighty "Oprah effect" in creating hot demand for a product. There are millions of examples.

Tobacco is just another product that's vying for attention to drive demand.

I do think that some kids will start smoking because they see their favourite stars smoking, or see smoking featured in cool films. I also think a lot of kids won't. Parents can play a part in teaching kids to think critically about how they process media information. Hopefully those kids will have the intelligence and critical-thinking skill set to make wise decisions in their life. A lot of kids won't... and the Tobacco Industry is thankful for that subsection of the population every day, just as all the other product marketing gurus are out there. I'm guilty of succumbing to product placement all the time. It's pretty hard to escape it in this media saturated world.

Do I think we need to censor movies? No. Because then we'd have to start censoring other things society deems is "bad for us".

The focus should be on critical thinking skills, not on sheltering kids by keeping them in a bubble and away from "evil temptations".


WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 3:26:38 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,801
Location: Cakeland, United States


Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 3:48:12 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Can you imagine all the old B&W movies that would have to be changed? Or how about editing it out like they do swear/cuss words for television? Have them sucking on a straw instead of a ciggy? I think all the pc stuff and protect us from ourselves business is being carried to far.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 26, 2010 5:21:15 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
dancenude I was not even aware this was something being considered until today. Hell, so much for free speech. Maybe someone should suggest to the U.S. government that there should be a constutitional amendment to ban all tobacco period. I mean, hell look how it worked with alcohol. And think of what a shot in the arm it would be for the economically downtrodden. Every two bit thug and wanna be gang banger would be selling bootleg cigarettes overnight.

What the hell is happening? When I was growing up the world was getting steadily progressive. The stuff you would say out of earshot away from anyone else because it was dirty or might make some old lady blush finally started showing up on TV, and stuff you did not talk about was becomming okay.

Oh, and then Janet Jackson's titty gets flashed on TV for a split second and all the sudden the "moral majority" is coming back out of the wood work and trying to drag us back into the 1950s.

Then again being in the 21st Century is not all it's cracked up to be either (at least in the U.S.). I remember when the year 1984 rolled around and there was much hoopla over Geroge Orwell's vision of the future and how the world would change. The world did not change overnight, and everyone kind of laughed at the idea, but here it is some 26 years off from the date he got by flopping 48 into 84 and it seems by the day there is talk of new laws banning this and that or regulating this and that, making us just a bit closer to the kind of goverment dominated society Orwell imagined. The real question is what comes next? Are neighbors going to start reporting every little minor infraction their neighbors (who leave them alone and mind thier own business) make for some kind of good citizenship award. If there is not an end to all this crap it is going to be worse than the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany combined.

Smoking "education" in this country is worthless and usually left up to the tobaccoo companies themselves. I have yet to see a truth commercial that did not make me want to light up. They are so idiotic and non-smokers are portrayed as such dorks that I would wager they make smoking seem even more appealing to kids. Smoking education is not going to keep people from smoking or keep new generations from starting. The only thing to curb that would be government intervention (see a couple of paragraphs above for My views on that).

Smoking content being a reason for an R Rating. May as well boot most of the PG-13 crap back up to R's for allowing the one or two fucks you usually hear in the dialogue.

It is funny chefkathleen asked if the next step would be to edit cigarettes out of classic pictures and television. Being an avid anime fan I see it done all the time on modern shows. Chef Sanji from One Piece does nothing but smoke. In fact there is not a single character in anime who you will find sucking a lollipop all the time, so when the kids are watching Yu-Gi-Oh or Pokemon and someone is walking around with a sucker it is almost a sure bet that it is really a cigarette.

This country is so damn backward. Whitewash everything and try to pretend it does not exist, or try to make it into something the average person will associate with bad guys and crimminals.

What else can I say? Thanks again America for letting Me down and trying to drag the rest of the world down with you.

-MV
Guest
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 4:20:50 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Master_Vyle wrote:
dancenude I was not even aware this was something being considered until today. Hell, so much for free speech. Maybe someone should suggest to the U.S. government that there should be a constutitional amendment to ban all tobacco period. I mean, hell look how it worked with alcohol. And think of what a shot in the arm it would be for the economically downtrodden. Every two bit thug and wanna be gang banger would be selling bootleg cigarettes overnight.

What the hell is happening? When I was growing up the world was getting steadily progressive. The stuff you would say out of earshot away from anyone else because it was dirty or might make some old lady blush finally started showing up on TV, and stuff you did not talk about was becomming okay.

Oh, and then Janet Jackson's titty gets flashed on TV for a split second and all the sudden the "moral majority" is coming back out of the wood work and trying to drag us back into the 1950s.

Then again being in the 21st Century is not all it's cracked up to be either (at least in the U.S.). I remember when the year 1984 rolled around and there was much hoopla over Geroge Orwell's vision of the future and how the world would change. The world did not change overnight, and everyone kind of laughed at the idea, but here it is some 26 years off from the date he got by flopping 48 into 84 and it seems by the day there is talk of new laws banning this and that or regulating this and that, making us just a bit closer to the kind of goverment dominated society Orwell imagined. The real question is what comes next? Are neighbors going to start reporting every little minor infraction their neighbors (who leave them alone and mind thier own business) make for some kind of good citizenship award. If there is not an end to all this crap it is going to be worse than the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany combined.

Smoking "education" in this country is worthless and usually left up to the tobaccoo companies themselves. I have yet to see a truth commercial that did not make me want to light up. They are so idiotic and non-smokers are portrayed as such dorks that I would wager they make smoking seem even more appealing to kids. Smoking education is not going to keep people from smoking or keep new generations from starting. The only thing to curb that would be government intervention (see a couple of paragraphs above for My views on that).

Smoking content being a reason for an R Rating. May as well boot most of the PG-13 crap back up to R's for allowing the one or two fucks you usually hear in the dialogue.

It is funny chefkathleen asked if the next step would be to edit cigarettes out of classic pictures and television. Being an avid anime fan I see it done all the time on modern shows. Chef Sanji from One Piece does nothing but smoke. In fact there is not a single character in anime who you will find sucking a lollipop all the time, so when the kids are watching Yu-Gi-Oh or Pokemon and someone is walking around with a sucker it is almost a sure bet that it is really a cigarette.

This country is so damn backward. Whitewash everything and try to pretend it does not exist, or try to make it into something the average person will associate with bad guys and crimminals.

What else can I say? Thanks again America for letting Me down and trying to drag the rest of the world down with you.

-MV


Brava MV hello1
Guest
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:33:48 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Loislane wrote:
Brava MV hello1


dancenude Thank you and you're welcome lois.

-MV
DamonX
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 12:22:42 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2009
Posts: 798
Jacknife wrote:
Agreed. I think people who smoke are idiots, but that isn't a reason to ban or restrict there appearance in films. You stop people doing stupid things by education not by banning them from films.


Damn you Jackknife! Everytime I go to post, I find you've already posted the same thing before I get to it.
I guess I second your motion.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49:39 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
I don't think that films with smoking or drinking should be automatically rated R...However, I feel they should at least be rated PG-13. True this is stuff in the real world and people see it on a daily basis BUT if i had a 4 year old child, I wouldn't want them to be watching a little kid movie like Carebears and having them all smoke. You know?
T_Elle
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2012 3:04:47 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/17/2012
Posts: 137
Location: Canada
Hmm... I've never written a negative comment to someone's post before, as I don't like to be impolite, but... really? Carebears? I have yet to watch kids' shows and movies with my children, the ones that are specifically for very young ones, and see anything innappropriate in there. These things don't happen now, and I highly doubt this is something you will ever see added to these shows.

They are talking about movies with an adult audience in mind, but that young people could still watch. For example, the Die Hard movies, or Lethal Weapon. The heroes in these movies all smoked. But I would be more concerned about my kids hearing the "Yippie Kayay, motherfucker!" in Die Hard, or Joe Pesci's "they fuck you" rant in Lethal Weapon 3, than I would about the fact that the main character smokes. I don't personally think movie ratings should depend on whether or not the hero has unhealthy personal habits.

Out and out banning is never a way to make a certain behaviour undesirable. In fact, it tends to make certain behaviour more appealing. It's been done with books, alchohol, and any number of other things, and it never seems to work. There's nothing more fun that doing something because it's forbidden and tabboo.

Which is kind of why Lush is so much fun, I guess. At least, for me. Shhh
MrNudiePants
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2012 4:05:52 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,226
Location: United States
T_Elle wrote:
Hmm... I've never written a negative comment to someone's post before, as I don't like to be impolite, but... really? Carebears? I have yet to watch kids' shows and movies with my children, the ones that are specifically for very young ones, and see anything inappropriate...


Really? You've never seen "Alice in Wonderland" then... One of the main characters smokes constantly, and it's hinted that there's more than just tobacco in the bowl...
Guest
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2012 4:43:46 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
MrNudiePants wrote:


Really? You've never seen "Alice in Wonderland" then... One of the main characters smokes constantly, and it's hinted that there's more than just tobacco in the bowl...


Didn't Cruella De Vil from 101 Dalmations smoke also? I can't remember, it's been awhile, but I seem to recall a cigarette in a long black filter for her ...
T_Elle
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2012 10:26:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/17/2012
Posts: 137
Location: Canada
The character in Alice in Wonderland and Cruella Deville... I'd forgotten about those, and I stand corrected.

I still don't think either of those movies should have an R rating because of it, but maybe I'm a bad parent. Regaeman Man
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:15:56 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
just my two cents here but in both cases that were cited above I believe that both characters weren't exactly the good guys. The smoking was easily identifable with each character. In both cases it puts a bad taste in the mouth of all those young movie goers. PG it is!
archerintraining
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 2:30:17 AM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 5/27/2012
Posts: 27
Location: United States
You know, for some reason I'm always amazed by the government's ridiculous attempts to censor the American public. Despite what the government thinks, most people do not watch a movie or cartoon and think, "Oh, hey, the main character just lit up, man I wish I had a cig!" The only time most people would think that is if they were already smokers, or had been in the past. As a kid I watched plenty of movies that had smoking, drugs, and alcohol in them. The only one out of the three that I do is smoke. Why? Because it had nothing to do with the movies and shows. I smoke because as a teenager my friends and my dad smoked. I wanted to fit in, and emulate someone I loved. I don't drink or do drugs because I think they're nasty. See? A choice. I could have joined my wilder friends in drinking and drug taking, but I chose not to. Why? Because I'm a thinking, individual with free will.

As far as I know, no one has ever had a gun pressed to their head with the holder saying, "You better smoke that cig! You hear me? If you don't, I'll put a cap in ya head. I'll end you if you don't take that drag! I said puff bitch!" That means that everyone who smokes, everyone who has ever smoked, and everyone who will ever smoke has made a choice.

Further more, if people are so weak willed, so easily swayed, that they are affected by something they see on the screen, then shouldn't we all be mass murderers? Shouldn't every one of us be killers, terrorists, and all around violent people? I can guarentee that for every cigarette you see in a movie, cartoon, or tv show, I can show you a thousand acts of violence. Should we remove violence from movies, shows, cartoons, and even books? I hope everyone likes cards...oh wait, no, that's gambling. Strike that. Knitting?

This removing smoking from movies is not to help protect America's children. It's to see how far the government can infringe on our rights, on our free will, before we say enough is enough. The government has always used morality, god, and children to achieve their goals. They do this not because they care about these things, but because they know you do. If the government cared about people smoking, they would pull all smoking ads, ban tobacco in all it's forms, burn the tobacco fields, and treat it like any other illegal substance. Instead the government wants people to smoke, they just don't want you to realize it. The tobacco companies have lobbists in Washington. The government wants you to smoke because the tobacco company pays them. The government allows a substance that kills you with every inhale to exist because it makes them money, and they are more than happy to let us pay them to kill ourselves.That is the truth of the matter. Therefore, the only reason the government would even consider removing free advertisments for smoking in movies is if they knew that seeing someone in a movie smoking does not actually encourage people to start smoking.

nazhinaz
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 4:59:41 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 295
Location: Longview, United States
I believe we can't delete all our history.
The harmful effects of Tobbacco are just a recent discovery.
We need to keep our history without distorting it.
We all visualize Sherlock Holmes with a pipe.
And so do we visualize all great actors of the past, who were shown smoking.
Sure, we should campaign against smoking; but should allow smoking as an indiviual choice of the person, as long as his smoking is not injurious to the health of others, including his/her kids.
If we involve governments into our choices of eating and like, we may have to allow them into our bedrooms sooner or later.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 6:35:53 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656



Would one of these images make you want to smoke? dontknow
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:19:36 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Guest wrote:








OMG...I just realized she is smoking in this scene! Whistle
blazestcyr
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:46:45 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/19/2011
Posts: 737
Location: where bugs die
when u go to the movies

it is all about sustained disbelief

the movies are a place where we go to lose ourselves

to take out smoking, drinking sex is silly

we have a choice to go see a movie

stop blaming the world for your vices


you..do..have..a choice...your own damn brain
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 8:43:24 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Although people are impressionable even more so the younger people. (think subliminal messages)Would they not want to be as cool as their hero on screen that smokes? Or be as tough as the bad guy that smokes? Perhaps that is the thinking behind the banning of smoking in films etc.
Delphi
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 9:10:44 AM

Rank: Nerdzilla
Moderator

Joined: 6/30/2012
Posts: 2,771
Location: United States
Movies are about characters as much as they are about plot lines. To have depth, characters must show their flaws. To give an R rating to a film with smoking is like giving an R rating to those with characters who drink, sunbathe, eat poorly, or don’t exercise. It just isn’t reasonable. We are all flawed, and the characters we create are a reflection of that.

If smoking does in fact end up getting an R rating, a number of things might happen in society. Parents, whom the rating system is supposed to help, will likely become exasperated with the rating system. Most parents don’t really give a shit about Alice in Wonderland, but they do about A Clockwork Orange. Both with the same rating...? Also, while it may make smoking “more taboo,” I think the flip side is that kids may end up more judgmental toward the people in their lives that do smoke (friends, parents, family, police and presidents).

I started smoking at fourteen. Why? Because I was bored and it was a way to kill time. And I thought it was kind of cool. A friend of mine started at nineteen, well after the 17 year old mark of seeing an R rated movie. Why? No idea. The point is that regardless of how much people want to force others into healthiness, sometimes it won’t work. All we can really do is educate and hope people change. Then we have to turn the pointer finger around and see what’s going on inside ourselves.

By the way, I quit smoking at twenty one. It didn’t appeal to me anymore, even though actors still smoked on screen and musicians still smoked onstage.

Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:00:46 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 784,656
Just as for violence I think the danger is making smoking look cool, which is a disgusting habit that luckily has more and more ways to erradicate these days.
MissyLuvsYa
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:17:32 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 561
Location: somewhere on the coast, United States
Will making smoking even more taboo increase it's appeal to teenagers? YES

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.